I admit I was a little cut to the quick: that way, ethnologists only focus on “noble” materials which are not material objects ...? In fact, we must admit that this is true. Besides, Olivier Aurenche (1995) wrote:

“In short, we could say that the archaeologist studies a vanished society, while the anthropologist studies a living society. If the object of the study is the same, methods differ however: the archaeologist uses the only material remains of this society without access to the actors, while the ethnologist questions the actors without always paying attention to the material remains.” [2]

I’m not myself a specialist of kinship systems, myths, and religious ceremonies, and even if I focus on the relationship with the environment, including biological materials and technical tools (mainly agricultural), but it is true I jump too quickly over the detailed description that the material culture deserves, for example in Siwa.